***The OFFICIAL 2012 Stars Regulars Thread***

[smartalecc5]

Maybe they know they wont be allowed in the US when it becomes regulated so they're maxing their revenues now because there is no long-term for some of their customers...?

[Roger Mainfield]

Originally Posted by krmont22

Stars basically took money from the top and claimed they were giving it to the bottom when they weren't. They were just pocketing the rest of the money. This is not going to stop 24 tabling nits. It will make them have to play 20%+ more hands. So expect even more time outs, slower tables, etc.

This is a really bad change for 24 tabling nits, no doubt. However I don't completely agree with the rest. Fish will get credited with a lot more rake, however they will obviously get a much worse rate on it then a supernova would. The original changes included lowering the rake though. Moving the rake from 5% to 4.5% would have helped microstakes and SSNL a lot.

Originally Posted by ISO

Stars have a history of this Marketing ploy. Make a host of changes, adjust them slightly to look like there negotiating and appease some of the players concerns. It seems to work pretty successfully.

Given how the online poker market is arguably at its most unstable its been in its short history, it seems stars are looking more short-term towards maximising profits as opposed to having longevity in the industry and looking after there most loyal customers.

With regards to the state of the games i guess its hard for any1 to gauge, those at ftp argued it didn't improve (we all know how that story ends) but i guess time will tell.

Olivier Busquet posted some rumours he heard about stars, and how they were concerned about how long fish were staying at their site, and how it was the lowest its ever been. These changes, and the scrapped ones, would have giving quite a bit more VPPS to fish. What I don't understand about this is how Stars introduced a ton of changes, and then took away the positive changes (Not for MSNL+ though) and people were somehow slightly happier. For the vast majority of people on 2p2 the 4.5% change was a really good thing. The fact they are such a commanding leader in the poker world definitely had an effect on this, because for most SNE there inst anywhere else to go. Party and Ipoker are still vastly inferior to Stars in almost every way.

[Pugliesea]

Hey guys ! I know many of you know me from the tables !

Ill be in las vegas with some friends from January 10th until early february.

If any of you are there and want to hang out, play some poker, get some girls! etc lmk!

Agustin

PuglieseA

[horse84]

so is it standard that a table fills before the first hand is even dealt or is there some new kind of software?
i used to have like 10 hands hu...

[Imrahil]

I usually get a few hands in with the fish before the bumhunters come. I try and play super quick though and usually gamble more.

[Clayton]

Originally Posted by krmont22

This is not going to stop 24 tabling nits. It will make them have to play 20%+ more hands. So expect even more time outs, slower tables, etc.

Sounds like it's gonna eventually bankrupt them though, or force them to change their ways.

[smartalecc5]

Just installed Stars and cashed out my remaining money in my account. My account now has 0 VPPs and $0. *sigh*

I saluted the screen while I confirmed my final cashout.

R.I.P. VicTree 2007-2011

[Clayton]

So as I see it, there are 2 feasible systems (unless someone has another idea or I'm dumb, both perfectly reasonable options)

1) Winner take all. Whoever wins the pot gets the rakeback/points.

2) Contributed rake. Points are divided up by who contributed to the pot. So if the rake is $5 (hypothetical) and my posted BB contributed to 1% of the pot, I would get 1% of the rake/points/etc

Seems like option 1 would be the most fair, however option 2 would probably be healthier for the games since the fish will be contributing lots of money to pots and not winning before or at showdown enough.

I wonder if time charge games are something that could ever become feasible online or if it's something that would unfairly exploited.

[cashy]

Originally Posted by horse84

so is it standard that a table fills before the first hand is even dealt or is there some new kind of software?
i used to have like 10 hands hu...

easy seat maybe?

[chisness]

Originally Posted by Clayton

So as I see it, there are 2 feasible systems (unless someone has another idea or I'm dumb, both perfectly reasonable options)

1) Winner take all. Whoever wins the pot gets the rakeback/points.

2) Contributed rake. Points are divided up by who contributed to the pot. So if the rake is $5 (hypothetical) and my posted BB contributed to 1% of the pot, I would get 1% of the rake/points/etc

Seems like option 1 would be the most fair, however option 2 would probably be healthier for the games since the fish will be contributing lots of money to pots and not winning before or at showdown enough.

I wonder if time charge games are something that could ever become feasible online or if it's something that would unfairly exploited.

All true

[dcg3]

As a player who plays 100nl and below these are my thoughs.

Stars needs to stop raking the **** out of the small and microstakes games on their site. Money in poker moves up and the midstakes games cannot be good if players cannot progress past micro stakes/small because of the rake, for example if a player starts at 10nl is a slight loser the rake will eat all his money and he will quit, if that player was able to win a little with less rake he will move up ect.

Imo that is how you make the games better, you look after the players at bottom not the top, I think that 10 20+ shuold be raked more to make up the loss, The amount that microstakes players pay in terms of bb/100 is huge and needs to be reduced

[MatthewRyan]

money really does not move up, huge misconception. its the exception, not the rule.

[chisness]

Matthew: How do you know? I admit to thinking that was true, definitely very important to try to clear up.

[makeit3bets]

I also thought money generally travelled up. It sure as hell doesnt trickle down afaik.

[MatthewRyan]

Fish money makes it way to the tables almost exclusivity via deposit and sit or tourny cashers taking their winnings to a table of their choice. The idea of a fish say playing .5/1 and running it up enough to play 10-20 is the v rare exception.

Reg money moving up AND being losers ofc happens, but if you look at the "regs moving up stakes" as group they will be net winners.